Two sad and lovely hands

[PrayingMantis]

Here are two hands from a recent 10+1 SNG. I'll post the results later, although you'll probably be able to get a feel of them anyhow...

1.

5 left, I'm 2nd stack with T2100. Blinds are 50/100. I find TT UTG, and bet 300. UTG+1, T1000, who is kind of weak-tight and rarely raises, calls. All other fold.

Flop: 9 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 2 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 5 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

I see this as a happy flop, and since I got him covered I bet 700, to put him all-in. Is this the right move?

2.

OK, we're still 5 but now I'm 4th stack with T950. Blinds 50/100. UTG, 2nd stack with 2400, who limps a lot with garbage, limps again. Folded to me on button with 44, and I go all-in for a pot of 300 (SB and BB are avarage stacks, pretty tight players. I think the table sees me as a tight player too. havn't played much...). Is this move sounds reasonable? or am I on tilt and this is the most stupid try-for-a-steal?


Any thoughts will be appriciated,


PrayingMantis

[Guy McSucker]

I like your play on the first hand. The bet of 700 is a pot size bet anyway. If you check and he bets, you are surely calling. But, if he has overcards, you would absolutely prefer him to drop the hand now, so set him in.

However, I think your play on the second hand is questionable. I prefer to reserve steal raises for those times nobody is in the pot yet. I realise you have seen this guy limp with garbage. Have you seen him fold after limping? If so, perhaps this is an okay move. With a hand like 44 you want a high chance of winning it without a fight.

Guy.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Hand 1: You don't have to risk 700 here. If you bet 700 and he's as weak-tight as you say, he'll only call with hands that beat you, but he'll fold hands you beat to a smaller bet, so you can bet 300 here and fold if he raises.

Hand 2: I'd toss the 44 here. You're getting short-stacked, but you'll get called too often and almost all the time you'll be up against 2 overcards. You can still be patient.

[Guy McSucker]

you can bet 300 here and fold if he raises.


Really? If you do this, there will be 1700 in the pot and 400 to call. You have an overpair. Can you really be so sure he's not on top pair or something like 88 that is not afraid of one overcard? You're getting better than 4-1.

Guy.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Against most opponents, I'd agree with you. However in this case, the poster stressed that this opponent is extremely weak-tight.

[PrayingMantis]

I'll start with the 2nd one: trying to steal with 44.

I agree that I havn't seen UTG folds if his limps get re-raised heavily. On the other hand, He was never reraised by this amount (not far from half his stack). I thought he might be limping with any A, any K, so he will actually be a small dog many times, if he calls. Well, blinds folded and he called with K7o. I don't know about this call, It isn't a bad call maybe, with the pot-odds, but you'll agree that his limping was terrible. Anyway, he caught a K. Next time I'm waiting for a better hand...


2nd Hand: TT with a flop of rags.

My reason for betting 700, was that if I bet only half the pot, say 300, this guy is able to call me with his better pocket pair, and not even raising, because I didn't see him raise anywhere. And if he calls - there was no chance I'm not betting again on the turn, no matter what card falls, with a pot of 1350, and he only has 400, putting him all-in there. So I couldn't see a reason not to bet the pot and put him all-in right away with my over-pair. He called with KK.

This is my reasoning. I understand that betting less, like Kurn suggested, may have it's benefits here too, but I'm still not convinced about it. I'll be happy to read more from you...



PrayingMantis

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

He called with KK.

Hmm, he's either even more weak-tight than you suggest or somewhat tricky.

When he called you on the flop, what range of hands did you think that meant? Pairs down to what? Any unpaired hands other than AK? If you just checked, would he bet an Ace-high hand or 88?

[PrayingMantis]

I see the real question now: it's about the definition of weak-tight. Is a weak-tight player with T700, is a one to raise all-in with KK, on a flop of rags, if he has to call 300 for a pot of 1130? after just calling with it to a PF raise?

When I've written he's weak-tight, I meant not seeing many flops, and when hitting something - not getting too much out of it: that means he bets weakly, if at all, hardly re-raises, usually waits for others to bet, and might fold to a scary raise even if he is much ahead. Am I wrong with defining him?

[Scooterdoo]

First hand: I think you played it just fine

Second hand: Not terrible. You are getting to the point where you'll need to catch a hand soon. You still have enough chips to scare people from calling you. There's a very good chance that you don't get called with this hand and if you do you're probably a coin flip to double up. When you get down to this amount of chips and your opponents are at 2-3 times your chip count you need to get back in the game quickly before your chips get so low that you are forced to move in defensively and certainly you will get called and you'll have to win out.

With your move you have a good chance of either taking the blinds right there or doubling up if you get called. You rarely win because you're always getting great cards. You need to be aggressive and do the best with what you're dealt. Nothing wrong with your move at all.

[PrayingMantis]

When he called my PF raise, I put him on something like 88-QQ , AK, AQ, maybe AJs, ATs. I didn't think it's AA, KK. And I felt that on this flop I'm ahead most of the time, losing only to 99, QQ, JJ, and I think he might have folded JJ after my flop bet.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Then by your definition, it sounds like he would not bet AK or 88 into that flop if checked to. He'd likely only bet if you're behind, so by checking, you allow him to define his hand. But it all comes down to your judgment on what that strange preflop call means.

If he waits for other people to bet his good hands for him, the only question you need to answer on the flop is "what are the odds I'm ahead right now?"

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

With that read, your bet was correct.

[PrayingMantis]

Thanks for being the only supporter for this move! I was almost completely convinced I'm wrong, but now there's a ray of light. I think I tend to see things as you describe them - blinds are going to be 100-200 soon, we are only 5 and it's going to get real ugly. I didn't want to be called, and felt that if I'm called I'm probably not much worse than coin flip. And I was right (see "Results").

It's always a tough fight between the need to get chips now, and the hope that next hand, when its UTG+1, or UTG, or BB, it will get better than 44. Well, sometimes it just doesn't. And these are fast games...

I guess the right answer to this depends on the structure. If the blinds are getting high real fast, like on Party, or TGC, I tend to see my steal with 44 a +EV move. On Stars or UB it might be -EV.



PrayingMantis

[PrayingMantis]

Thanks for the feedback. I find that almost 10% of the players I play against on those 10+1 SNG, act in some strange weak-tight ways, sometimes to an almost unbelievable extent. Last one somebody limped with AA, along with 5 limpers, flop is rags, nobody bets, turn is J, somebody bets weakly, as if it's limit, AA calls, river x, first guy bets a little more, AA calls. End of hand.



PrayingMantis